Microsoft, i4i patent dispute set to be heard by Supreme Court

A four-year old patent dispute is about to be put to rest. In a complaint originally filed in 2007, Toronto-based firm i4i alleged that Microsoft used proprietary code to display XML files in its Microsoft Word 2003 product. A Texas jury ruled in favor of i4i in August of 2009, and awarded the company a $290 million settlement — Microsoft was also barred from selling Word 2003 until i4i’s code was removed. The U.S. software giant has excavated the bits in question, but Microsoft is looking to the country’s highest court for a more preferable decision. After several failed attempts to have i4i’s patents reviewed and invalidated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case. Both Microsoft and i4i will be given 30 minutes to explain to the eight Justices — Chief Justice John Roberts has recused himself — why the patent is valid. But the case will take on a greater meaning, going well beyond this one piece of intellectual property. Microsoft will argue that patent law, as it currently stands, is stifling innovation, whilst i4i will argue the contrary. The court began hearing arguments this Monday, and its decision is expected to have a significant, and potentially far reaching, impact on patent cases currently in waiting.

Patent law, as it stands, is stifling innovation. Copyright isn’t helping much either.

KCRic

While I agree 100% with that the equation: MS(-speed)*control=innovation is false.

Anonymous

Dude… wait, what?

Anonymous

“The court began hearing arguments this Monday”

Oral Argument in Supreme Court cases generally lasts 1 hour (30 mins per side), so arguments both began and ended today. Even the Bush v. Gore case, which ultimately decided who the 43rd U.S. President would be, was argued in 90 minutes, with 30 minutes each given to each of three attorneys arguing the case (2 for Bush, 1 for Gore).

It’s also important to note that The Chief Justice did not take part in the oral argument for this case despite being involved in the day’s other argument. As he has previously disclosed his ownership of Microsoft stock Chief Justice Roberts normally recuses himself from cases which could reflect on Microsoft’s performance.

DoWork

Patent law is stifling innovation, yet doesn’t Microsoft still sue people when it comes to their patents? I’m all for protecting your own ass, but practice what you preach if you are going to make these claims.

serpentor

i4i

Is that name supposed to intimidate people?

Drew

Microsoft, STFU!!! We’ll agree to the fact that “…patent law is stifling innovation..”, if you can put a muzzle on that Billionaire weirdo Paul Allen, about inventing everything and trying to sue everyone.